‘They were not chess pieces’: Senior Taliban leader hits out at Prince Harry over ’25 kills’
A senior Taliban leader has told Prince Harry that the militants he killed in Afghanistan were “not chess pieces, they were humans”.
Responding to revelations in Harry’s forthcoming memoir that he killed 25 Taliban fighters, Anas Haqqani, a senior aide to the interior minister, tweeted: “Mr Harry! The ones you killed were not chess pieces, they were humans; they had families who were waiting for their return.
“Among the killers of Afghans, not many have your decency to reveal their conscience and confess to their war crimes.”
Watch Sky News special at 7pm tonight – Harry’s Book: The Fallout
Another Taliban official, Bilal Karimi, the deputy spokesman, said Harry’s admission showed that “such crimes were not limited to just anyone” and added that “every occupier has a history of such crimes.”
Harry writes about his two tours of duty in Afghanistan in his highly anticipated book, Spare, a copy of which Sky News obtained before its release next week.
In it, the prince reveals that he killed 25 fighters and says he did not think of them as “people”, but instead as “chess pieces” that had been taken off the board.
He adds: “It was not something that filled me with satisfaction, but I was not ashamed either.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Harry’s claims may incite attacks’
Shortly before Mr Haqqani tweeted, a former senior army officer told Sky News that Harry’s comments were “ill-judged” and could incite an attack on British soldiers.
Colonel Richard Kemp, who took command of British forces in Afghanistan in 2003 before his retirement, said the prince’s suggestion that British soldiers are trained to see their enemies as “less than human” was particularly dangerous.
He said Harry’s remarks “were probably ill-judged for two reasons. One is his suggestion that he killed 25 people will have reincited those people who wish him harm.”
Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts
Col Kemp, who retired in 2006, added: “The other problem I found with his comments was that he characterised the British Army basically as having trained him and other soldiers to see his enemy as less than human, just as chess pieces on a board to be swiped off, which is not the case. It’s the opposite of the case.”
He said it was these comments in particular that could “incite some people to attempt an attack on British soldiers anywhere in the world”.
Col Kemp also said people who support the Taliban may now be “motivated to kill Harry” because of memories that have been “resurrected” by his comments.
He added: “Let’s hope they don’t succeed and I’m sure he’s got pretty good security, but that’s one problem.”
Analysis
‘Sharing’ may seem a good idea to whatever therapists Harry has been seeing but not in the minds of his former military mates and commanders.
There are very good reasons his friends and other veterans have expressed disappointment and concern and urged him to stop.
Not least because the revelations about the number of Taliban fighter he has killed will make life potentially more dangerous for his family and other British veterans.
Harry was the grandson of Britain’s then head of state, the Queen, when he served in her armed forces and killed what he says were 25 Taliban fighters.
The fact that he has described doing so, so dispassionately is a propaganda and recruitment godsend to the country’s enemies, something borne out by the reaction on Taliban and other extremist social media.
Whether he likes it or not, as a member of the Royal Family Harry’s role is political and has geopolitical and diplomatic consequences.
He does not seem to have thought that through.
He certainly did not seek authorisation from His Majesty’s Government prior to publication for details that could have a direct consequence on British subjects and interests.
Read more:
How did William and Harry’s relationship break down?
Analysis: Harry cuts a sad, self-indulgent and naive figure
Harry says ‘ball in their court’ for family reconciliation
Lord Darroch, a former national security adviser, said if he were guiding Prince Harry he would have “advised against the kind of detail that he goes into”.
“But it’s out there now,” he said.
“In terms of the detail I personally wouldn’t have gone there, but it’s done now.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Prince Harry: ‘I saw red mist in William’
Harry’s book also includes an explosive claim he was physically attacked by his brother William during a row over his marriage to Meghan Markle.
He also writes about the moment he was woken up by his father to be told his mother had been in a car accident.
The duke also admits to having taken cocaine and says he asked his father not to marry Camilla.
In a new trailer for an interview with ITV to promote the book, the duke says he saw a “red mist” in William during an argument between them.
He claims his brother “wanted me to hit him back, but I chose not to”.
Sky News can reveal that the government has rowed back on a national compensation scheme for victims of child sexual abuse, despite it being promised under the previous Conservative administration.
Warning – this story contains references to sexual and physical abuse
A National Redress Scheme was one of 20 key recommendations made by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), but a Home Office report reveals the government has scrapped it because of the cost.
Marie, who is 71, suffered alleged sexual, physical, and emotional abuse at Greenfield House Convent in St Helens, Merseyside, between 1959 and 1962, and is still fighting for compensation.
Greenfield House Convent, where Marie says she was abused
As soon as she arrived as a six-year-old, Marie says her hair was cut off, her name changed, and she experienced regular beatings from the nuns and students.
She claims a nun instigated the violence, including when Marie was held down so that her legs were “spread-eagled” as she was sexually abused with a coat hanger.
Merseyside Police investigated claims of abuse at the convent, but in 2016, a suspect died before charges could be brought.
Marie has received an apology from the Catholic body that ran the home; she tried to sue them, but her claim was rejected because it was filed too long after the alleged abuse.
Marie, 71, is still fighting for compensation for the abuse she says she suffered as a child
In February, ministers said the law would change for victims of sexual abuse trying to sue institutions for damages, which was a recommendation from the IICSA.
Previously, people had to make a civil claim before they were 21, unless the victim could prove a fair trial could proceed despite the time lapse.
Campaigners argued for the time limit to be removed as, on average, victims wait 26 years to come forward. Changes to the 1980 Limitation Act could lead to more people making claims.
Peter Garsden, President of The Association of Child Abuse Lawyers
Civil cases ‘can take three to five years’
But Peter Garsden, president of the Association of Child Abuse Lawyers, worries that when it comes to historical abuse where the defendant is dead, institutions will still argue that it is impossible to have a fair trial and will fight to have the case thrown out of court.
Mr Garsden said it takes “between three and five years” for a civil case to get to trial.
He warned that claimants “can end up losing if you go through that process. Whereas the Redress Scheme would be quicker, much more straightforward, and much more likely to give justice to the victims”.
Victim awarded £10 compensation
Jimbo, who was a victim of abuse at St Aidan’s children’s home in Cheshire, took his case to the High Court twice and the Court of Appeal three times, but, after 13 years, all he ended up with was £10 for his bus fare to court.
Despite the Lord Justice of Appeal saying he believed that the abuse had occurred, Jimbo lost his claim because of the time limit for child sexual abuse claims to be made.
Read more from Sky News:
Call for Labour minister to resign over grooming gang remarks
PM says govt will fund further local grooming gangs inquiries if ‘needed’
Neither Marie nor Jimbo is likely to benefit from the removal of the time limit for personal injury claims, which is why Mr Garsden is calling on the government to implement a National Redress Scheme for victims of sexual abuse, as recommended by the IICSA.
Hundreds of millions paid to victims
The governments in Scotland and Northern Ireland have set up compensation schemes and paid hundreds of millions of pounds to victims.
In 2023, the then Conservative government said a similar scheme would be organised for England and Wales.
But the Home Office admitted in its Tackling Child Sexual Abuse: Progress Update that it “is not currently taking forward any further steps on the IICSA proposal for a separate, national financial redress scheme for all survivors of child sexual abuse”.
“In the current fiscal environment, this recommendation is very difficult to take forward,” it added.
For victims, the scheme was the last chance of compensation for a lifetime blighted by abuse.
“The money is about justice and about all the other people who have had to suffer this abuse,” Marie said.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway